Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2012-13 arose against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC, which affirmed the Assessing Officer's disallowances. The assessee contended that there were communication gaps during the faceless hearing process.
Held
The Tribunal noted the possibility of communication gaps in the newly introduced faceless hearing system and, in the interest of justice, restored the appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC. The assessee was given three effective opportunities to plead and prove their case.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was denied a fair opportunity to present their case due to communication gaps in the faceless hearing system, necessitating a remand.
Sections Cited
144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
Assessment Year: 2012-13 Vs. Income Tax officer, Sh. Dinesh Mathur, 3B, Bharat Apartments, 31, Ward-59(6), IP Extension, New Delhi Delhi PAN :AAMPM0778R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Ashish Jain, CA Department by Sh. Yogeshwar Sharma, Sr. DR Date of hearing 14.05.2025 Date of pronouncement 14.05.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)- 2, Jaipur’s DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2023- 24/1059563635(1), dated 10.01.2024, involving proceedings under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC in it’s lower appellate order has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowances/additions herein.
Learned departmental representative vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case.
I have given my thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and I am of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel involving the newly introduced system of faceless hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.